We carried out a review of the data available to us about Support to Live at Home Central on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Support to Live at Home Central, you can give feedback on this service.
This service provides care and support to people living in 'supported living' settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. At the time of our inspection 11 people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People received a consistently good service and felt safe with the support they received from the staff.
People’s medicines were being managed safely by staff trained to administer medicines.
Staff knew people well and provided support to them in the way they wished. People’s individual needs and preferences were recorded and understood by the staff. Support was provided which ensured people received nutritious food and drinks of their choice.
Staff were supported through planned training, supervision and a yearly appraisal.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were involved in decisions about their care and staff sought appropriate consent and asked people what help they needed. People received care that respected their privacy and dignity as well as promoting their independence wherever possible.
Each person had an individual care plan including an assessment of their needs, risk assessment and detailed information about how to achieve agreed goals.
The service had a complains policy which had been designed so that it could be understood and used by the people using the service.
The service was well-led by a dedicated management team who demonstrated understanding and commitment to the needs of the people who used the service.
Senior staff carried audits of the support provided and sought the views of the people using the service through surveys.
Rating at last inspection: At our last inspection on 10 June 2016 the service was rated Good. The report was published on19 August 2016.
Why we inspected: We inspected the service as part of our inspection schedule methodology for ‘Good’ rated services.
The service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were protected from the risk of abuse as staff had attended training to ensure they had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities, if they suspected abuse was happening. Evacuation plans of how to leave the accommodation in the event of an emergency such as a fire were in place.
People were supported by a sufficient number of suitably trained and experienced staff and 24 on call support was available for the staff to call upon. The management team were looking to increase their presence at the service outside of core hours. Some people considered that additional 1:1 designated time would be of benefit to people on occasions given their condition on the day or to prepare for an event.
The provider had ensured appropriate recruitment checks were carried out on staff before they started work at the service. Staff had been recruited safely and had the skills and knowledge to provide care and support in ways that people preferred.
The provider had systems in place to manage medicines and people were supported to take their prescribed medicines safely.
The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been undertaken by relevant professionals. This ensured that the decision was taken in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005, DoLS and associated Codes of Practice. The Act, Safeguards and Codes of Practice are in place to protect the rights of adults by ensuring that if there is a need for restrictions on their freedom and liberty these are assessed and decided by appropriately trained professionals. People at the service were subject to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff had been trained and had a good understanding of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Positive and caring relationships had developed between people and staff. The staff on duty knew people well and throughout the day we observed positive interactions between people using the service and staff. People were supported to make day to day decisions and were treated with dignity and respect at all times. People were given choices in their daily routines and their privacy and dignity was respected. People were supported and enabled to be as independent as possible in all aspects of their lives. We saw that people enjoyed days out, holidays to a caravan park, and attending social clubs that were people’s individual choice.
Staff knew people well and were skilled and competent in meeting people’s needs. Staff were supported and supervised in their roles. People, where able, were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care and support. Daily notes were written in an informative style and were up to date.
People’s health needs were managed appropriately with input from relevant health care professionals. We saw that people attended appointments with their GP and also hospital consultants. People were supported to maintain a nutritionally balanced diet and sufficient fluid intake to maintain good health. Staff ensured that people’s health needs were effectively monitored.
People were supported to maintain relationships with friends and family so that they were not socially isolated. There was an open culture approach by the management and staff were supported to provide care that was centred on the individual. The care plans were written in a person-centred style and there was clear involvement of the person themselves and their families. The team leader on duty was approachable to support staff and enabled people who used the service to express their views.
People and their relatives were supported to report any concerns or complaints and they told us they felt they would be taken seriously. People who used the service, or their representatives, were encouraged to be involved in decisions about the service. The care plans were reviewed yearly and as required in response to changes in a person’s condition.. The provider had systems in place to check the quality of the service and took the views and concerns of people and their relatives into account to make improvements to the service.
There was a dedicated staff team working with the person and we saw that they had each been trained in safeguarding of vulnerable adults. The service was effective as it had put in place systems for monitoring the quality of the service provided. There was an accessible complaints policy and procedure should the service fall below expectation. There was a procedure to make sure only suitable staff were employed, and a staff rota showing adequate staff cover at all times and suitable on-call arrangements for emergency cover. This meant there were systems in place to ensure the service was well managed and responsive to people's needs.